The Jewish Ethicist: Bad Business

Do I have to give up my job if I think it entails aiding immorality?

Q. I work in a routine job in a business that I consider immoral. Do I have to give up my job because I am aiding immorality?

A. This very important question was submitted by a number of readers who work in industries such as casino gambling, cigarettes, armaments, and so on. It is beyond the scope of this column to pass judgment on which industries are actually problematic; this particular column is devoted to guidance to individuals who according to their own judgment feel that their employer is involved in an unsavory activity and are trying to evaluate if they are unethically abetting this activity.

The main criterion we need to apply in these cases is the three levels of connivance established by Jewish law (see Selling Term Papers) These three levels, in decreasing order of gravity, are:

1. Enabling a transgression. If the transgression could not take place without your participation you are enabling the wrongdoing to take place. This is categorically forbidden by the Biblical injunction, “Don't place a stumbling block before the blind” (Vayikra 19:14). This could apply if you have a unique talent that you devote to the success of your employer.

2. Abetting a transgression. This means that you take an active role in the unethical activity, but if you didn't do it someone else would. This is a less severe level but still ethically problematic. One reason is that the “somebody else” can excuse his own participation by pointing out that you would take the job otherwise. In the end each person justifies his participation by pointing to the other, and no one is exercising moral leadership. We need to carefully evaluate the example we are setting before putting ourselves into such a situation.

3. Condoning a transgression. Normally we are obligated to protest wrongdoing; whenever we remain silent and even benefit from it, there is a good chance we may seem to be condoning it.

The ethical status of condoning depends on the extent of identification we show with our participation as well as our ability to make an effective protest. A manager is obligated to show significant identification with the employer, but a bookkeeper usually doesn't have to. If an organization is already the subject of protests then taking a stand against their actions is likely to have some effect; if you are alone in your objections than realistically quitting your job is not likely to be an influential statement.

Let's take some examples to see how we would apply these criteria. One reader had a senior marketing position for a tobacco company; his job was to convince people to start smoking. This is a responsible job which certainly requires identification with the employer, and so would constitute “abetting”. His personal conviction was that it is unethical to persuade people to smoke; given his active role this person should start looking for a new position. However, this is a second-degree connivance, and in the meantime he doesn't necessarily have to risk poverty by quitting outright.

If this person has unique talents that the employer wouldn't find in a replacement, it may be considered “enabling”. In this case he should immediately resign his current responsibilities. Perhaps he could request a transfer to some other, less responsible position in order to maintain his income.

Another reader is employed by a casino operator in a routine job, like a bookkeeper. This reader considers casinos immoral. This is not “enabling” since there are plenty of bookkeepers in the world, and it is not “abetting” since a bookkeeper is not taking any active role in the immoral aspect of the business (she is not a croupier, for example).

The problem of condoning is also not severe. Plenty of people don't consider casinos immoral, so quitting her job in protest is unlikely to have an impact. And in most cases such businesses don't demand that low-level employees show any special identification with the company. It follows that this person needn't quit her job.

A few employers expect employees at all levels to display identification with the business, for example by wearing special clothes even outside the workplace. In this case there would be a problem of condoning. A problem could also exist in a business where effective protest is already widespread; in this case taking a job could be viewed as granting legitimacy to an unethical activity. (Example: routine job such as janitor for an organized crime syndicate.)

Another reader is employed in a perfectly legitimate business, but the owners use their profits for immoral activities. Here there is no problem of abetting or condoning since the employee is not involved even indirectly in immorality. In rare cases there would be a problem of enabling, if the employee has a unique talent without which the boss wouldn't make enough money to carry out his crimes.

Of course our aspiration should be to find a job in which we feel we make an important contribution to humanity, but realistically we cannot always realize this aspiration. In the meantime, we should shun employment that actively makes the world a less ethical place. At the same time we should recognize that even if our jobs are less than ideal, we make the world a better place as we use our salaries to support our families and contribute to charity.

About the Author

Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir is Research Director at the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem (www.besr.org). He studied at Harvard, received a PhD in Economics from MIT, and rabbinic ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Prior to moving to Israel, he worked at the Council of Economic Advisers in the Reagan administration. Rabbi Dr. Meir is also a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Jerusalem College of Technology and has published several articles on business, economics and Jewish law. He is the author of the two-volume, "Meaning in Mitzvot (Feldheim), and his Aish.com columns form the basis of the "Jewish Ethicist" book (ktav.com).

The opinions expressed in the comment section are the personal views of the commenters. Comments are moderated, so please keep it civil.

Visitor Comments: 1

(1)
Ron,
August 10, 2010 11:02 PM

Other Torah verses to consider that show that it is better not make money from bad/unethical companites

THe Torah says in sefer Devarim I think that one should not derive any benefit from idolaters or idols, like the jewels used for them. Also in sefer Devarim, the Torah says that one can't use unjustly obtained money to give to the Temple (the line about prostitutes hire/dog
Don't these verses suggest better not to make money from unethical businesses?

Submit Your Comment:

Name:*

Display my name?

YesNo

Email:*

Your email address is kept private. Our editor needs it in case we have a question about your comment.

Since honey is produced by bees, and bees are not a kosher species, how can honey be kosher?

The Aish Rabbi Replies:

The Talmud (Bechoros 7b) asks your very question! The Talmud bases this question on the principle that “whatever comes from a non-kosher species is non-kosher, and that which comes from something kosher is kosher.”

So why is bee-honey kosher? Because even though bees bring the nectar into their bodies, the resultant honey is not a 'product' of their bodies. It is stored and broken down in their bodies, but not produced there. (see Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 81:8)

By the way, the Torah (in several places such as Exodus 13:5) praises the Land of Israel as "flowing with milk and honey." But it may surprise you to know that the honey mentioned in the verse is actually referring to date and fig honey (see Rashi there)!

In 1809, a group of 70 disciples of the great Lithuanian sage the Vilna Gaon, arrived in Israel, after traveling via Turkey by horse and wagon. The Vilna Gaon set out for the Holy Land in 1783, but for unknown reasons did not attain his goal. However he inspired his disciples to make the move, and they became pioneers of modern settlement in Israel. (A large contingent of chassidic Jews arrived in Tzfat around the same time.) The leader of the 1809 group, Rabbi Israel of Shklov, settled in Tzfat, and six years later moved to Jerusalem where he founded the modern Ashkenazic community. The early years were fraught with Arab attacks, earthquakes, and a cholera epidemic. Rabbi Israel authored, Pe'at Hashulchan, a digest of the Jewish agricultural laws relating to the Land of Israel. (He had to rewrite the book after the first manuscript was destroyed in a fire.) The location of his grave remained unknown until it was discovered in Tiberias, 125 years after his death. Today, the descendants of that original group are amongst the most prominent families in Jerusalem.

When you experience joy, you feel good because your magnificent brain produces hormones called endorphins. These self-produced chemicals give you happy and joyful feelings.

Research on these biochemicals has proven that the brain-produced hormones enter your blood stream even if you just act joyful, not only when you really are happy. Although the joyful experience is totally imaginary and you know that it didn’t actually happen, when you speak and act as if that imaginary experience did happen, you get a dose of endorphins.

These chemicals are naturally produced by your brain. They are totally free and entirely healthy.

Many people find that this knowledge inspires them to create more joyful moments. It’s not just an abstract idea, but a physical reality.

Occasionally, when I walk into an office, the receptionist greets me rudely. Granted, I came to see someone else, and a receptionist's disposition is immaterial to me. Yet, an unpleasant reception may cast a pall.

A smile costs nothing. Greeting someone with a smile even when one does not feel like smiling is not duplicity. It is simply providing a pleasant atmosphere, such as we might do with flowers or attractive pictures.

As a rule, "How are you?" is not a question to which we expect an answer. However, when someone with whom I have some kind of relationship poses this question, I may respond, "Not all that great. Would you like to listen?" We may then spend a few minutes, in which I unburden myself and invariably begin to feel better. This favor is usually reciprocated, and we are both thus beneficiaries of free psychotherapy.

This, too, complies with the Talmudic requirement to greet a person in a pleasant manner. An exchange of feelings that can alleviate someone's emotional stress is even more pleasant than an exchange of smiles.

It takes so little effort to be a real mentsch.

Today I shall...

try to greet everyone in a pleasant manner, and where appropriate offer a listening ear.

With stories and insights,
Rabbi Twerski's new book Twerski on Machzor makes Rosh Hashanah prayers more meaningful. Click here to order...